| ▲ | GolfPopper 14 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"Investigation" is a pretty generous way to label "some thugs working for an authoritarian state want to look for incriminating stuff - including criticism or mockery of them or their leader - on your communications device". Whatever the American legal system may say, a couple of thugs with no warrant conducting searches and seizures of data is a blatant violation of the Constitution's intent. This is the sort of behavior Americans used to rightfully condemn. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | samtheprogram 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Calling border patrol "thugs" doesn't really bolster your argument to anyone except people who already agree with you. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | schoen 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I would also like the fourth amendment to apply at the border. Have you read United States v. Flores-Montano? The border search exception (which I disagree with) is pretty old. Can you find an era in which Americans in general found it objectionable or were united in rejecting its application to data? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||